Friday, January 29, 2016


Photo
Zebra fish in the lab of Dr. Leonard Zon. The tiny transparent creatures allow researchers to see cells and organs without cutting the fish open. CreditShiho Fukada for The New York Times
It was just a tiny speck, a single cell that researchers had marked with a fluorescent green dye. But it was the very first cell of what would grow to be a melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer. Never before had researchers captured a cancer so early.
The cell was not a cancer yet. But its state was surprising: It was a cell that had reverted to an embryonic form, when it could have developed into any cell type. As it began to divide, cancer genes took over and the single primitive cell barreled forward into a massive tumor.
Those were the findings of Dr. Leonard Zon of Boston Children’s Hospital, Dr. Charles K. Kaufman, and their colleagues, in a study published Thursday in the journal Science that offers new insight into how cancers may develop. The researchers stumbled on that first cell of a melanomawhen they set out to solve a puzzle that has baffled cancer investigators: Why do many cells that have cancer genes never turn cancerous?
The work was in fish that had been given human genes, but the investigators found the same genetic programs in human melanomas, indicating that they too started when a cell reverted to an embryonic state. Much more study is needed, but researchers say the result can help them understand why melanomas and possibly other cancers form, and potentially prevent them. And it may provide a way to stop melanomas from growing back after they have been cut down by new targeted drugs.
Photo
Dr. Leonard I. Zon, at of Boston Children’s Hospital, poses for a portrait with an aquarium of zebra fish at the Karp Family Research Building in Boston, MA.CreditShiho Fukada for The New York Times
“It’s a significant advance in the field,” said Ze’ev Ronai, the scientific director of La Jolla Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute, a nonprofit research center. Dr. Ronai was not involved in the study.
The prevailing idea about the development of a cancer is that genes randomly mutate in a healthy cell, perhaps from sun exposure, perhaps from simple bad luck. The mutated genes drive aberrant cell growth, and the growing mass of cells accumulates more and more mutations that drive it to grow faster and spread until, finally, a cancer is formed.
Yet researchers keep finding cancer genes in perfectly normal, healthy cells that never turn malignant. These are genes that take the brakes off cell growth and are considered essential drivers of tumor growth.
Human skin cells are exemplars of the effect. In one study, Peter Campbell and his colleagues at Cambridge University looked for 74 cancer genes in normal skin cells. In many they saw the same pattern of mutations as is found in skin cancers. But since these cells were not cancerous, they realized something must be missing. What, besides powerful cancer genes, is needed to make a cancer?
Moles also show the effect. “One of the things we’ve known about moles is that the vast majority never will become melanomas,” said Dr. Keith T. Flaherty, a melanoma expert at Massachusetts General Hospital who was not associated with the new study. “The odds are against it.” Yet almost every mole contains one of two potent gene mutations that are characteristic of melanomas, BRAF or NRAS, he added, and a third also harbor another notorious cancer gene, P53. New targeted drugs that block BRAF can slow melanoma growth.
“More and more data suggest that just having mutations is not sufficient to cause cancer,” said Dr. Kornelia Polyak, a breast cancer researcher at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, who was not associated with the new study. “You need the right context.”
That was where Dr. Zon and his colleagues began 10 years ago. They were investigating melanoma by creating it in zebra fish, tiny transparent creatures that allow researchers to see cells and organs without cutting the fish open. The researchers put human BRAF and P53 genes in every melanocyte, the pigmented skin cells, of the fish. If genes were all that was needed for cancer, the fish would explode with melanoma. But the researchers found only one to three melanomas per fish.
“That told us there has to be an additional event,” Dr. Zon said.
By luck, they found it. The pigmented skin cells that became cancerous had turned on a gene, crestin, that is normally activated only in cells that are part of the neural crest, a group of cells pinched off early in embryonic life from a region adjacent to the brain. These primitive cells, depending on where they are in the embryo, can turn into pigmented skin cells or a variety of other types of cells, like those that make up bones and teeth, the covering of the brain or those that sheath and insulate nerve cells. Once cells develop into their mature tissue type — pigmented skin cell, bone or tooth, for example — the crestin gene shuts down. Those pigmented skin cells in the fish that had an active crestin gene had reverted to that primitive state when they were malleable, their fates still wide open.
The investigators marked cells with an active crestin gene with a fluorescent dye, enabling them to spot the cells because they glowed bright green. Then they observed what happened. Every time a cell lit up green it divided and turned into a cancer. Cells that did not light up never turned into a cancer.
That makes sense, Dr. Polyak said, because such primitive cells are more proliferative and more able to spread throughout the body. That is their role during development. They also can develop their own blood supply, something tumors do, too.
The zebra fish work was convincing, Dr. Ronai said. “They provide a pretty strong demonstration that that pathway is correct,” he said. “It’s a significant advance in the field.” It can, he said, allow researchers to monitor the early development of melanomas.
But it also gives rise to a host of questions and hypotheses. These include why melanomas with BRAF mutations eventually become resistant to drugs that block the BRAF cancer gene. Could it be, Dr. Flaherty suggests, that the drugs prune off only the melanoma cells that grew from the original embryo-like seed cell? Might the drugs be sparing the embryo-like seed cell, freeing it to form another cancer? If so, those seed cells could be a new drug target. The hope is that if they are destroyed, the tumor will be gone for good.
But, Dr. Polyak asked, why then would a pigmented skin cell spontaneously revert to a primitive embryo cell? “What is the stimulus that allows a single cell out of millions to become cancerous?” she said. “Why does it turn on, this particular genetic program? What is the trigger and why does it happen so rarely? Why, why is this happening?”
With the zebra fish model, Dr. Zon says, “we have the ability to ask.”

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Cancer riddle, solved: Researchers reveal how cancer cells form tumors

January 26, 2016

Cancer riddle, solved
University of Iowa researchers have documented how cancerous tumors form by tracking in real time the movement of individual cells in 3-D. They report that just 5 percent of cancer cells are needed to form tumors, a ratio that heretofore had been unknown. Credit: Soll Laboratory.
Cancer is a mysterious disease for many reasons. Chief among the unknowns are how and why tumors form.
Two University of Iowa studies offer key insights by recording in real time, and in 3-D, the movements of cancerous human breast tissue cells. It's believed to be the first time cancer cells' motion and accretion into tumors has been continuously tracked. (See accompanying videos.)
The team discovered that  actively recruit healthy cells into tumors by extending a cable of sorts to grab their neighbors—both cancerous and healthy—and reel them in. Moreover, the Iowa researchers report that as little as five percent of cancerous cells are needed to form the tumors, a ratio that heretofore had been unknown.
"It's not like things sticking to each other," said David Soll, biology professor at the UI and corresponding author on the paper, published in the American Journal of Cancer Research. "It's that these cells go out and actively recruit. It's complicated stuff, and it's not passive. No one had a clue that there were specialized cells in this process, and that it's a small number that pulls all the rest in."
00:37
00:37
Researchers at the University of Iowa tracked in real time the movement of individual cancerous breast tissue cells. The video shows how the cancerous cells extend and probe for other cells, then reel in cells to form ever-larger tumors. It's …more
The findings could lead to a more precise identification of tumorigenic cells (those that form tumors) and testing which antibodies would be best equipped to eliminate them. Soll's Monoclonal Antibody Research Institute and the Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank, created by the National Institutes of Health as a national resource, directed by Soll and housed at the UI, together contain one of the world's largest collections of antibodies that could be used for the anti-cancer testing, based on the new findings.
In a paper published last spring in the journal PLOS One, Soll's team showed that only cancerous cells (from a variety of cancers, including lung, skin, and  known as glioblastomas) engaged in tumor formation by actively soliciting other cells. Like evil-minded envoys, individual cancer cells extend themselves outward from the original cluster, probing for other cells in the area, the researchers observed. Once it detects one, the extended cell latches on and pulls it in, forming a larger mass. The activity continues, the cancerous extensions drawing in more and more cells—including healthy cells—as the tumor enlarges.
"There's nothing but tumorigenic cells in the bridge (between cells)," Soll said, "and that's the discovery. The tumorigenic cells know what they're doing. They make tumors."
The question is how these cells know what to do. Soll hypothesizes they're reaching back to a primitive past, when these cells were programmed to form embryos. If true, perhaps the cancerous cells—masquerading as embryo-forming cells—recruit other cells to make tissue that then forms the layered, self-sustaining architecture needed for a tumor to form and thrive.
Think of a Death Star that's built up enough defenses to ward off repeated attacks. Or, less figuratively, how bacteria can conspire to create an impenetrable film on surfaces, from orthopedic implants to catheters.
"There must be a reason," Soll said. "You might want one big tumor capable of producing the tissue it needs to form a micro-environment. It's as if it's building its own defenses against the body's efforts to defeat them."
Researchers at the University of Iowa tracked in real time the movement of individual, healthy cells and cancerous breast tissue cells. This video shows that healthy breast tissue cells remain separated. The healthy cells' activity is in marked …more
In the AJCR paper, the researchers compared the actions of human breast tissue cells (MoVi-10') to a weakly tumorigenic, parental breast cancer cell line (MCF-7). First, they found that over a 50-hour period, MoVi-10'-only cells grew more in density, primarily by joining together, than did MCF-7.
Also, in all instances, regardless of the ratio of MCF-7 to MoVi-10' cells in the cluster, only MoVi-10' cells reached out and drew in other cells—including —to the growing mass.
Cancer riddle, solved
Cancerous cells "recruit" cells into tumors by extending a bridge of sorts and reeling in both healthy and cancerous cells. The UI researchers documented the phenomenon for the first time in real time and in 3-D. Credit: David Soll laboratory, University of Iowa
"The results here extend our original observation that tumorigenic cell lines and fresh  cells possess the unique capacity to undergo coalescence through the active formation of cellular cables," the authors write.
The finding lends more weight to the idea that tumors are created concurrently, in multiple locations, by individual clusters of cells that employ the cancer-cell cables to draw in more cells and enlarge themselves. Some have argued that tumors come about more by cellular changes within the masses, known as the "cancer stem cell theory."
Soll's team also discovered that the Mo-Vi10' cells move at 92 microns per hour, about twice the speed of healthy . That's important because it helps scientists better understand how quickly tumors can be created.
More information: www.ajcr.us/files/ajcr0014702.pdf 

Friday, January 22, 2016

What Life Is Really Like After Breast Cancer: Joan Lunden Gets Personal

What Life Is Really Like After Breast Cancer: Joan Lunden Gets Personal

January 21, 2016
(Photo: Andrew Eccles)
When the sunniest woman in the history of morning news got hit with triple-negative breast cancer at age 63, her life changed, irreversibly. A year after finishing treatment, Joan Lunden says she’ll never be her old self, but that her new normal is filled with revelations, joy, and yet another amazing reinvention.
Perfection is really irritating, especially first thing in the morning. Which may be why for 20 years, Joan Lunden was so beloved as Good Morning America’s cohost. Sunny and soothing if you tuned in before your caffeine hit, she nevertheless distinguished herself by not being perfect. Though always beautiful, she struggled with weight, went through a very public divorce, and juggled kids and family like the rest of us. But she was always game, a supremely cheerful enthusiast—whether she was interviewing a president or bungee-jumping off a bridge. Lunden was also an outspoken advocate for women’s health issues before they were the fodder for every morning television show. (Want to pick up some healthier habits? Sign up to get daily healthy living tips delivered straight to your inbox!)
Yet none of this prepared her for a diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer, a particularly insidious form of the disease, which demanded 9 months of aggressive treatment: a lumpectomy, radiation, and 16 rounds of chemotherapy. Diagnosed in 2014, she is now cancer-free and crisscrossing the country speaking to health organizations and raising awareness. But I realized, as we sat down to talk, that behind the rainbows and unicorns she sometimes espouses in her speeches, Lunden is a vulnerable woman, wife, and mother who is still struggling to come to terms with life after cancer—what she calls the “new normal.”
Today, you’re celebrating more than a year of being cancer-free—you look great, but how do you feel?
You know, the time after treatment can sometimes be more emotionally difficult than during treatment. At least during, you’ve put yourself in the hands of these doctors, and everyone’s doing everything they can, you’re taking medication, and you’re fighting. Then, all of a sudden one day, they say, “OK, bye!” And you walk out the door and—well, I know I’m not alone in this, but I was an emotional basket case.
Describe to me what it was like when chemo was over and you had your very last radiation treatment.
My husband, Jeff Konigsberg, took me to get a necklace with a little pink stone that I’ve worn most days since. So that was like a little “let’s celebrate.” But I thankfully had been warned by the nurses that while everyone thinks you want to go celebrate, it’s interestingly and oddly emotionally difficult. They were right. I cried like a baby.
Because you’re thinking, What happens next?
Right. You can’t help but say, “Did we get it all?” Now am I just sitting around waiting for the other shoe to drop? Can you ever really feel safe and secure again? Cancer is not something that you get and get cured and never worry about again. It really isn’t.
You certainly haven’t talked about the “gift” of cancer, but you’ve talked about the silver linings. What are they?
Cancer reconnected me with my father. He was a cancer surgeon and died in a plane crash when I was 13. I realized that my dad’s light had been taken before his time and he had so much left to do. And that I was now in a position where I could pick up his legacy and carry on. That was meaningful to me—it was therapeutic, healing.
(Photo: Andrew Eccles)
How has having cancer changed you?
I’m not the same person I was 2 years ago. For one thing, I was always preaching to people about making healthy lifestyle choices, and it really took kind of getting hit between the eyes with a two-by-four to change my life—to really read food labels, for example. I’ve always been so driven, but now I’m stopping to ask myself about every venture, Am I expending too much work for not enough reward? I’ve just gone through very aggressive chemotherapy, and it really does take a toll on your body, there’s no getting around it.
What’s the toll?
My energy level, my physical capability is lower: I have to really be patient and work to get that back. I said the other day, “I’m not back to my old self"—and then I realized, I may never get back to my old self. Maybe there’s just your new self, your new reality, your new normal. And you make that new normal as good as it can be.
You often call yourself a "glass-half-full kind of girl.” But certainly this diagnosis must have been an incredible challenge to maintaining that attitude. Was there a point where you asked, “Why me?”
Never. It didn’t even occur to me. I’ve been taken to task on social media for talking about how important it is to have a positive attitude. And it’s usually people who have metastatic breast cancer, and they know they’re going to die, and you know, “Positive attitude isn’t going to cure us.”
But a positive attitude will certainly make the time you’re here on Earth more palatable and will certainly keep the fight in you to keep fighting to live until maybe we even find a better treatment for you. It will keep that fight stronger. There have been studies that show that patients who have a positive attitude and are optimistic have a better immune system, and they heal better, they recover better.
(Photo: Andrew Eccles)
This reminds me of the song you once said was your anthem: Carole King’s “Beautiful.”
Yes, I’ve tried to live those words: “You’ve got to get up every morning / with a smile on your face  /and show the world / all the love in your heart.”
And now it seems you’ve taken that love and are turning it toward other women with your advocacy work.
I have considered it one of those odd gifts from above that you get an opportunity to help other people go through dire diagnoses. Maybe by telling my story, I make women more vigilant. I know that I was a person who paid lip service to self-exams—but come on, let’s be honest, I didn’t do them. And I didn’t think I needed to because I didn’t have a family history. So breast cancer was someone else’s worry.
Right. It’s like, Something will get me, but not THAT!
Yes. Now that it’s happened to me, I guess I feel compelled to go out there and warn other women and make them more aware and make them more vigilant. And understand it’s not just about family history. It’s about the lifestyle choices that we make: whether or not we exercise, what we’re consuming, our stress levels, our lack of sleep. And all the other risk factors that can make us susceptible not only to breast cancers but all the other cancers.
But…surely you don’t blame yourself for getting cancer.
There is a certain sensibility of, How could I not have known? You know, I was such a health advocate.
But you really did lead a healthy life, particularly compared with the average American.
I hear people all the time say that I did everything right. However, there are other risk factors we don’t even think about that are kind of a factor of American life. We get married later, so we have children later. Well, if you have children after 30, that’s a risk factor. There are many women today who have trouble getting pregnant, so they have fertility treatments. That’s a risk factor. I took birth control pills for years—yes, I did. So I did IVF—yes, I did. So I had children late—yes, I did.
But your cancer was triple negative, meaning you did not have receptors for the hormones in the hormone therapy drugs, so it couldn’t have been fueled by the therapy. But OK, would you really have not taken HT?
I don’t know. Can I really say that I wouldn’t have? Let’s face it, you do it for all these reasons…to stay vibrant, to not have hot flashes.
(Photo: Andrew Eccles)
Are you still off sugar, wheat, and dairy like you were during your treatment?
I’m not as strict as I was because going on a restrictive diet during treatment meant that I didn’t have a lot of the crummy side effects of chemotherapy. I went bald, but I didn’t lose my fingernails, I wasn’t throwing up all the time. But now, it’s very difficult when you’re living in a house with two 10-year-olds and two 12-year-olds. I’m not an all-or-nothing person. I have to live with some compromises in order to live congenially with my family.
You seem so much younger than you are, and I don’t mean just in looks. Do you have an age you are in your head?
Forty-five! I can’t wrap my brain around the fact that I’m 65. To me that’s totally not possible. I wear leggings and boots! I work out and climb mountains! I’m a young person! But of course, if you ask anyone, “What is a senior person?” that answer is: 15 years older than you are.
And it probably helps that you’re married to someone 10 years younger.
Here’s something: When I was 29 years old, I got married to a guy who was 39 years old. We had three kids, but our likes and life were so disparate. You know, like, he wanted to go to jazz clubs and I wanted to go to a Pearl Jam concert. We were just so different, and so we got divorced. Twenty years later, I got married again when I was 49—and again I married a guy who was 39. Again.
That age is the sweet spot for you.
Yes. And the second time worked out much better.
So you’re married to a man 10 years younger, and you had two sets of twins, by surrogacy, in your 50s. Do you think something about the way we perceive age has changed?
We used to think that at 50 years old you were over the hill, and at 60 you retired, and you were probably dead at 70 or 75. Well, guess what: The average life expectancy of a woman is around 85 and men a few years younger. If we’re going to be living 20 to 30 years longer than previous generations, isn’t it that much more important to invest in our health? Like, who wants the extra 30 years if you’re going to have chronic illness and you’re going to feel horrible?
America hasn’t embraced this yet. Prevention is the one thing within our power, within our reach. And yet it’s easier to just say, “Well, you know, it’s destiny.” It’s not destiny. We predetermine our longevity by the life choices and the health choices we make today.
What other emotional factors have played a role in your recovery?
For the first 40 years of my life, I was incredibly shallow! I didn’t really introduce my real self to my spiritual side until I turned 40 and decided to take care of my health and change my life. I lost about 40 pounds, changed how I ate, and added exercise to my life. And I don’t think it’s that unusual for people who take control of their body on the outside to look for change on the inside. What if I could be more peaceful, more mindful? That’s where spirituality entered my life.
(Photo: Andrew Eccles)
How does mindfulness help you control your reactions to stress, fear, and anger?
I think most people believe how you react to events is not a choice. But you do have a choice. A simple example: Sometimes when I’m driving and I get all stressed out about something, I’ll say, Wait a second. Do you really want to go there?
Certainly one event that could have sparked a reaction was losing your hair. Do you still have the hair you buzzed off before chemo?
Yes! It’s in a piece of tinfoil in the back of my drawer. I can’t explain why I saved that hair. I also have all my wigs.
You’ve kept the wigs?
It’s too fresh. Too recent. Too real. Too unbelievable to be able to give them away and feel comfortable with that.
Do you still keep a journal?
Yes. I’ve done that for years. And I always title my journals.
What’s your latest one called?
“I Will Survive.”
So does that mean your anthem has changed from “You’ve got to get up every morning with a smile on your face”?
Now I think it’s “Fight Song"—it’s the song played at all breast cancer events. I’ve done 15 breast cancer events in the past few weeks, and I’ve always walked out on stage to that song. [This is my fight song / Take back my life song / Prove I’m all right song / My power’s turned on / Starting right now I’ll be strong]
I just met the artist, Rachel Platten. It’s a song that can mean something different for everyone, but she told me, "I worked for 16 years to try to make a career in music, and I’d just about given up, and then I wrote that song. I still have the fight left in me.”
And I put my arms around her and said, “Do you have any idea of how much you have empowered women battling breast cancer?” And both of us were in tears.
The Many Reinventions of Joan Lunden
20s: 
(Photo: Micheal Ochs Archives/Getty Images)
While her peers stressed about finals, Lunden spent her last year of college building her future. “I opened a modeling school, because it was something I could do,” she says. Then-20-something Lunden put on fashion shows—and still finished her homework.
30s: 
(Photo: Joe McNally/Getty Images)
Lunden caught her big break as a feature news and consumer reporter for Good Morning America in 1976. Four years later, she jumped to GMA cohost and became a household name to her devoted viewership. “I was in their living rooms for 2 decades,” she says. “And I’ve shared a lot of my personal life with them.”
40s:
(Photo: George Holz/Getty Images)
After she left GMA in 1997, the 47-year-old mom of three spent 2 years traveling with motivational speaker Tony Robbins and speaking to crowds of 20,000, despite her fear of public speaking. “My chest got red and rashy, and I would get a stomachache,” she says. “But I turned a total fear into a passion.”
50s: 
(Photo: L. Busacca/Getty Images)
By the time she reached 50, Lunden had married a man 10 years her junior and raised three daughters from her previous marriage—but she wanted more. Through the help of a surrogate mother, Lunden and her husband welcomed a set of twins in 2003 and another set in 2005.
60s:
(Photo: Ruven Afanador/Corbis Outline)
In June 2014, at 63, Lunden heard three scary words, “You have cancer.” After 9 months of aggressive treatment to rid her body of breast cancer cells and two tumors, Lunden’s disease went into remission. She still lives with the worry it’ll come back. “Cancer is not something that you get and get cured and never worry about again,” she says. “It really isn’t.”
Now: 
(Photo: Courtesy of Joan Lunden)
Even through 16 rounds of chemotherapy, Lunden stayed upbeat and positive. Now, having beaten her cancer, she’s found a new purpose in life—to support and empower women facing breast cancer. “I feel compelled to go out there and make other women more aware and vigilant.”
By Judith Newman
This article ‘What Life Is Really Like After Breast Cancer—Joan Lunden Gets Personal’ originally ran on Prevention.com.